Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36612088›Full record

ReviewCancers2022

Meta-Analysis of Pharmacological, Nutraceutical and Phytopharmaceutical Interventions for the Treatment of Cancer Related Fatigue.

Sriram Yennurajalingam, Zhanni Lu, Aline Rozman De Moraes, Nhu Nhu Tull, Michal J Kubiak, Yimin Geng, Clark R Andersen, Eduardo Bruera

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sriram YennurajalingamDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Zhanni LuDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Aline Rozman De MoraesDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Nhu Nhu TullDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Michal J KubiakDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1647-4038
Yimin GengResearch Medical Library, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8491-3151
Clark R AndersenDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1846-9117
Eduardo BrueraDepartment of Palliative Care Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI DIANE BODURKA · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: In this study we aimed to estimate the effectiveness of pharmacological, nutraceutical, and phytopharmaceutical treatments on CRF. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Psych info, CINHAHL and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to 30 September 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological, nutraceutical and phytopharmaceutical interventions for treatment of CRF for at least one week duration and have used valid tool to assess severity of CRF as a primary or secondary outcome were considered. Results: 32 eligible studies (4896 patients) were reviewed. For the overall meta-analysis, the random effect models yielded the treatment effect (95% CI) of −0.29 (−0.48,−0.09), p < 0.001. The meta-analysis did not show significant reduction of CRF with treatment with ginseng (n = 6), guarana (n = 3), megestrol (n = 2), mistletoe (n = 3), psychostimulants (n = 14), SSRI/antidepressants (n = 2). Corticosteroids (n = 2) showed significant reduction in CRF with treatment effects of 0.94 (−1.21, −0.67), p <0.0001, respectively. Conclusions: In this study, overall meta-analysis of all studies demonstrates significant reduction of CRF using Pharmacological, Nutraceutical and Phytopharmaceutical interventions with a pooled standardized treatment effect of −0.29. Metanalysis of Corticosteroids studies showed significant reduction in CRF. Further studies are needed.

Indexed as

cancerfatigueinterventionsmetanalysisnutraceuticalspharmacologicalphytopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID36612088
PMCPMC9817820
OpenAlexW4313247126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.